Inspection Order Granted in case of Diagnostics.AI Limited v Dentons UK & Middle East LLP [2025] EWHC 2071 (SCCO)

Posted 20 August 2025

Senior Associate, Graeme Wilson assists the Claimant, Diagnostics.AI in this significant Solicitor Client ruling.

The Senior Courts Costs Office has recently ruled that a client’s right to inspect solicitor files relating to billed work subject to a Solicitor Act Assessment continues even after the points of dispute have been served.

With over £2 million in fees at stake, the Claimant successfully argued that inspection of the work described in the Bills was necessary to break a negotiation deadlock and prepare for the detailed assessment.

The points of dispute ran to 72 pages providing the Defendant with the ample opportunity to narrow the issues but the replies were limited to just a brief 4-page document addressing preliminary issues only. The refusal by the Defendant to either provide inspection or serve more comprehensive replies to the points of dispute did not resonate well with Costs Judge Nagalingam who said “refusal to provide any response to the item by item objections does not serve the overriding objective and in my view makes the requirement for a very lengthy detailed assessment hearing inevitable.”

Whilst the Defendant criticised the Claimant for not making “any attempt to identify the particular issues raised by the points of dispute for which it is said that inspection is required”, this line of argument Judge Nagalingham says “completely ignores the fact that the replies are limited to the preliminary points only and run to just 4 pages.”

The Defendant opposed the application, raising concerns about confidentiality, privilege, and the cost of preparing files for inspection. However, Judge Nagalingam found these objections unpersuasive, noting that the Defendant had not shown willingness to engage constructively with the issue of inspection and had adopted an overall obstructive stance.

The judge emphasised that the application made clear that inspection was limited to work described in the bills only and did not seek disclosure or inspection of privileged or irrelevant documents. He cited Edwards v Slater & Gordon UK Ltd and Hanley v JC&A, affirming the court’s authority under CPR Part 31 and CPR r.3.1(2)(p) to order inspection in solicitor-client assessments under the Solicitors Act 1974.

Graeme Wilson says, ‘This Judgment underpins the level of transparency required in these types of proceedings between solicitor and client. This is particularly true where a solicitor has not taken up the option of responding fully to the issues in dispute.  With these types of high level fee disputes on the rise, it’s an important aspect for solicitors to get right, both during and after their period of instruction.”

Graeme Wilson, assisted Shaman Kapoor (instructed by Grosvenor Law) for the claimant

To read the full judgment click here.